How about draft-ietf-opsawg-model-automation-framework if we agree to change the name?:-)
-Qin -----邮件原件----- 发件人: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:[email protected]] 发送时间: 2019年11月13日 9:56 收件人: Tianran Zhou <[email protected]>; Qin Wu <[email protected]>; tom petch <[email protected]>; [email protected] 抄送: [email protected]; [email protected] 主题: Re: [OPSAWG] conclusion//RE: WG adoption call for draft-wu-model-driven-management-virtualization-07 Actually there are no 100% rules but the tools work better if you stick to draft-ietf-opsawg-something-00, and use the "Replaces" option when submitting the draft. "something" is really a matter of choice. However, draft-ietf-opsawg-model-driven-management-automation-00 is very very long. Regards Brian On 13-Nov-19 14:34, Tianran Zhou wrote: > Hi Tom and Qin, > > Anyway we need to change the name. As the author agreed the proposed naming > is better, IMHO, I do not see the workload. > Or is there any rule that not suggest to do so? > > Tianran >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Qin Wu >> Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 9:07 AM >> To: tom petch <[email protected]>; Tianran Zhou >> <[email protected]>; [email protected] >> Cc: [email protected]; >> [email protected] >> Subject: RE: [OPSAWG] conclusion//RE: WG adoption call for >> draft-wu-model-driven-management-virtualization-07 >> >> Hi, Tom and Tianran: >> It looks the new proposed draft name more reflects what it is, but >> referencing to IETF standards process, the draft name change rule is >> nothing more than one mentioned by Tom. >> I knew in the history, there was some exception about draft name >> changes, e.g., change draft-fielding-http-spec-01 into >> draft-ietf-http-v10-spec, using "replace" button to link them >> together and published as RFC1945, but it is the rare thing that seldom >> happens. >> Therefore I have no strong preference on what WG draft name should be >> changed. >> Thanks! >> >> -Qin >> -----邮件原件----- >> 发件人: tom petch [mailto:[email protected]] >> 发送时间: 2019年11月12日 18:02 >> 收件人: Tianran Zhou <[email protected]>; [email protected] >> 抄送: [email protected]; >> [email protected] >> 主题: Re: [OPSAWG] conclusion//RE: WG adoption call for >> draft-wu-model-driven-management-virtualization-07 >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Tianran Zhou" <[email protected]> >> Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2019 6:10 AM >> >>> Hi WG, >>> >>> Now we conclude the poll and adopt this document as WG draft. >>> We collected many interests and supports that can help the document >> evolution. >>> >>> Authors, >>> The chairs think "virtualization" in the draft name is confusing, >>> and >> suggest to rename it as "model-driven-management-automation". What's >> your thoughts? >>> Please republish draft-wu-model-driven-management-virtualization-07 >>> as >> draft-ietf-model-driven-management-automation-00 with only the date >> and file name changed. And please use "replace" in the data tracker. >> >> >> Tianran >> >> I think that that is a bad idea. Who cares what the draft name is? >> What is needed is a stable handle for it as it wends its way through >> the IETF after which the draft name vanishes in the dust of history. >> The only expected change is from draft-authername to draft-ietf at the time >> of adoption. >> Anything else just increases the workload, if only a fraction, for >> everyone involved. >> >> Tom Petch >> >> >>> Cheers, >>> Tianran & Joe >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: OPSAWG [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Tianran >> Zhou >>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2019 9:44 AM >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> Cc: >> [email protected]; >>>> [email protected] >>>> Subject: [OPSAWG] WG adoption call for >>>> draft-wu-model-driven-management-virtualization-07 >>>> >>>> Hi WG, >>>> >>>> This email starts a 2 weeks working group adoption call for >>>> draft-wu-model-driven-management-virtualization-07. >>>> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wu-model-driven-management-vir >> tua >>>> lization/ >>>> This document provides a framework that describes and discusses an >>>> architecture for service and network management automation that >> takes >>>> advantage of YANG modeling technologies. >>>> >>>> If you support adopting this document please say so, and please >>>> give >> an >>>> indication of why you think it is important. Also please say if you >> will be >>>> willing to review and help the draft. >>>> If you do not support adopting this document as a starting point >>>> for >> work >>>> on this topic, please say why. >>>> This poll will run until Nov 11. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Tianran and Joe >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> OPSAWG mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> OPSAWG mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg > > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg > _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
